Old Koreelah

Because RAA aircraft average cruise speeds are lower than GA, maybe the stats should also be analysed for accidents/fatalities per hours flown.

 

 

...Despite the dubious claim that global warming is a "fact" proven by "consensus science" (a misnomer if there ever was one), many scientists do not believe that global warming is taking place. More than 30,000 US scientists have signed a petition to this effect...

So consensus among scientists is "dubious" if it believes in warming, but alright if it does not?

 

What proportion of all scientists in the USA is that 30,000? Are they qualified in the relevant scientific disciplines? (thousands of scientists have expertise in totally unrelated areas, from linguistics to biochemistry. Should they be allowed to "vote"?

 

 

No, they merely talk down their noses like they are all knowing and couldn't possibly be wrong.

Sorry if I was one of those. Any good scientist would support a theory until replaced by a better one. That's science; not an outcome, more a process, or an approach.

If they are wrong about global warming we'll only be embarrassed; if they're right we're in big trouble.

 

 

...i havent heard of any jab 160s falling apart but am interested in looking up bad incidents of the bra ...

Sorry it's only heresy, Jeff but I have heard of a low-wing aircraft which fired it's BRS and landed on water with serious injury to the pilot. Arriving vertically on water is like hitting concrete. The BRS depends on undercarriage to absorb a lot of the impact.

 

 

We are having a warm winter at the moment and you know what the climate change wankers reckon about that. It is warm because we are getting wind off the ocean and not the usual westerlies, is this caused by green house gases? probably not.

Have the people who worry about climate change called you a wanker? Or do they try to convince you with logic? Scientists predicted increasing variation in the weather and greater extremes: heat waves, cold snaps, droughts and floods. That is happening.

Many factors affect the climate, which is constantly changing. We are now one of those influences. The earth stored carbon away for hundreds of million of years. Now we are returning it to the atmosphere in a geological blink of the eye- and people can't imagine this would have any effects!

 

 

While you are all hacking on about man made climate change, how can you possibly justify flying for recreation, or racing cars or dirt biking. I can justify it because I don't do enough of it to make one scrap of difference compared to the volcano belching away in Indonesia.

A valid point, Rank. One large volcanic eruption could spew out enough dust to reduce global temperature by as much as a concerted world-wide effort to reduce emissions. We can't predict what nature does, but we know the impact of our species. Each of us needs to pull his weight.

 

 

600 years ago 98% of experts did not believe the earth was flat - search for flat earth myth. Scholars and scientists have known of the spherical earth since the 14th century.

...and thousands of years before that the ancient Greeks had calculated its approximate diameter. Lots of ancient and medieval navigators knew the flat earth theory was silly fantasy.

 

 

. Really? were you going to stop eating beef? driving your car? flying your plane? using electricity?...

After being raised on a dairy farm I gave up mammal products thirty-five years ago. My carbon footprint is about a third of the average Australian's, but I can easily reduce it.

 

...All the carbon tax was going to do is stifle the economy and create poverty.

- That's errant rubbish. Other government policies have done far more damage to industry and living standards. Have a good read of independent comment on the current budget.

 

...What is our estimated carbon emission, 1% of the world emissions? And what about the scientists who say man made carbon is minuscule compared to other natural events such as volcanoes?

Australia is the world's biggest exporter of coal. Our whole economy has been skewed out of whack by the boom in mineral exports to China. The effect on our exchange rates has hastened the demise of our manufacturing industry. Like a junky, we can't get enough of those coal dollars, and we're trading away the farm to maintain our living standards.

 

If that is true then cause of the problem needs to be addressed, places like China, the US, I can't see how imposing a tax on Australians would have any effect on the climate.

... So we in Australia can carry on with our high living standard and expect the rest of humanity to do something about it?

We're on borrowed time. Our descendants will be reading this discussion. Are you sure you are doing the best for them?

 

 

True, Tech, the climate always goes thru cycles. The current trends are unprecedented and there is plenty of evidence that we are the main cause. People were willing to make enormous sacrifices for past wars, some of them pointless; most of us would be happy to foregoe a few luxuries to ensure a future for our kids. The carbon tax was helping to create new industries.

 

 

It's a bit like a debate on religion. Despite overwhelming evidence of rapid warming and that we are a major cause, people grasp at scraps of evidence to support our old way of life. I'd rather believe the vast number of responsible climate scientists than the minority who are funded by the fossil fuel industry. Like a coal train gathering speed down a steep grade, the melting of permafrost and release of collossal quantities of greenhouse gases will seal our fate. It may already be too late to stop the momentum, but our government could at least continue with the small but successful changes made by the previous one. But no, their idealogical zealoutry will make us a pariah in the international community. When hundreds of millions are displaced from their low-lying countries and come ashore here, we will be on our own.

 

http://m.smh.com.au/comment/science-going-back-to-dark-ages-20140531-zrqmx.html

 

 

...Just like the left are 'very confident' about the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming hoax based on BS experts...

Oh dear, GG. you really must open your mind. If you are so convinced that we can go on as we have been, then perhaps you should invest everything you have in a house at sea level.

 

 

Yep, you're right Pete. After watching the show, I can see that the trailer didn't tell the full story.

 

I commend Dick for his efforts to remove that blockage in the airspace. For many of us, flying along the coast is for perfect weather only, because we have to transit the lane around Willy.

 

 

Like Mark Twain said, rumours of the death of AvGas are exaggerated. The phasing in of a replacement is taking as long as the adoption of metric measurements.

 

Those yanks sure don't like change.

 

.

 

 

The trailer has Dick Smith saying nothing has been done in thirty years. Perhaps he's unaware of the intensive searches conducted by VRA people over many years. The terrain and vegetation is a major challenge.

 

 

There was some discussion on a previous thread that the various additives may not be compatible. With so many exotic chemicals mixed into petrol, pure ethanol is starting to look attractive.

 

 

...until there is easy access to unleaded Avgas, I am going to be only running on premium unleaded mogas to prevent lead fouling problems and eliminate contamination of the sump oil.

Does this country still produce AvGas? I read somewhere that during the war the lead was supplied separately and added to the fuel before use. If so, perhaps the refiners might be persuaded to produce an occasional batch without lead. Sold in drums, there would surely be a market.

 

 

...I made some coloured float balls...

That's got my attention. I imported some special red "floaties" for my sight tubes, but one has developed a leak and slipped below the fuel level. Can you tell us about yours?

 

 

I am not in favour of rapaciously cutting down all the trees in a forest, and I am even more against this if this used for low value-added products such as chipboard. I am very much in favour of sustainable forest management as I described in post #72 above. This is actually better, in most instances, than locking them up by the state.

As long as some old growth sections are left for wildlife and re-seeding, selective logging has the least impact. That's how my grandad managed forests. He also planted mobs of trees during the depression. Decades later some of my less-educated greenie comrades tried to prevent them from being logged- until it was pointed out that the nice big gum trees were in rows.

 

 

Decades ago we drove past miles of trashed forest in eastern Tassie. Large branches were pushed up into windrows ready for burning. We followed a truck load of big, straight hardwood logs. The timber mills of my home district could have converted it into high-value sawn timber. The truck turned into the Triabunna woodchip plant.

 

 

Good idea. A pilot might have kept the speed under control. It must have exceeded VNE; bits started falling off.

 

 

Right on, 80kt. The Greens are the party which best addresses my political priorities, but they are a broad church. I totally disagree with their policy on forestry. Having grown up in a timber town I have seen the impact of their wide-brush approach; too much forest, originally was set aside for sustainable timber production, has been locked up in poorly-managed National Parks. Science has taken a back seat to the need for the Big Gesture.

 

If the LNP were to go back to actual liberals values, including saving the future for our kids, I might vote for them.

 

 

I don't see why it needs to be a recognised course though. It should be about educating members not costing them money for useless qualifications. I am all for RAA developing maintenance workshops and courses, but don't see why we'd be wasting our time with RTO. I fail to see where this fits in RAA's mission statement.

The question is should our association foster training via already-established schools, or take on the training itself. I guess Kieth is suggesting that once RAAus gets on top of current issues, they try to get ahead of the game that CASA is playing.

 

I totally agree with rhysmcc: I'd be interested in training tailored to our needs and delivered by knowlegeable people.

 

But even if we built up an excellent program CASA could dismiss it as irrelevant if it does not fit with National standards. Competency-Based Training is a great idea in theory, but puts too much emphasis on paperwork.

 

 

I am surprised no one is doing this as a matter of course. We have been doing this in GA since time infinitum. Surely we daily inspect the aircraft before flight, all you have to do is sign the aircraft log or maintenance release in the case of GA if the aircraft passes the inspection.

...then you put the log in the aircraft and take off?

Surely all maintenance records should be kept separate from the aircraft in case of accident?

 

 

SStorchy

 

I needed some answers to a few sticky questions from a techie and he did not want to reply to my emails so i kept sending them every hour on the hour. Took him a week to realize that i was not going away and expected him to do his job.

 

You should do the same to both the raa and casa.

Is it that simple, Ozzie? In my case, after I was well and truly shafted, I dutifully followed all the guidelines available to me...and trusted that the authorities would have the decency to at least acknowledge my letters. I was eventually told they would be filed but ignored. It's very easy for clever people to misuse bureaucratic guidelines- and nobody seems to care.

 

 

...but that would involve bending the truth well past the elastic limit!

...never let the facts get in the way of a good story!